The widespread misinterpretation of p -values as error probabilities

Raymond Hubbard

Journal of Applied Statistics, 2011, vol. 38, issue 11, 2617-2626

Abstract: The anonymous mixing of Fisherian ( p -values) and Neyman--Pearsonian (α levels) ideas about testing, distilled in the customary but misleading p > α criterion of statistical significance, has led researchers in the social and management sciences (and elsewhere) to commonly misinterpret the p -value as a ‘data-adjusted’ Type I error rate. Evidence substantiating this claim is provided from a number of fronts, including comments by statisticians, articles judging the value of significance testing, textbooks, surveys of scholars, and the statistical reporting behaviours of applied researchers. That many investigators do not know the difference between p ’s and α’s indicates much bewilderment over what those most ardently sought research outcomes—statistically significant results—means. Statisticians can play a leading role in clearing this confusion. A good starting point would be to abolish the p > α criterion of statistical significance.

Date: 2011
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/02664763.2011.567245 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:japsta:v:38:y:2011:i:11:p:2617-2626

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/CJAS20

DOI: 10.1080/02664763.2011.567245

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Applied Statistics is currently edited by Robert Aykroyd

More articles in Journal of Applied Statistics from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().